FX-4350 vs Phenom X4 9650

VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.08
FX-4350
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
2.09
+93.5%

FX-4350 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24021875
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.081.58
Architecture codenameAgena (2007−2008)Vishera (2012−2015)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)29 April 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speedno data4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)4096 KB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography65 nm32 nm
Die size285 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data61 °C
Number of transistors450 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.275 V - Max: 1.4 V

Compatibility

Information on Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM2+AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350.

PCIe versionno datan/a

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Phenom X4 9650 1.08
FX-4350 2.09
+93.5%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Phenom X4 9650 1721
FX-4350 3321
+93%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Phenom X4 9650 238
FX-4350 444
+86.6%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Phenom X4 9650 758
FX-4350 1107
+46%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.08 2.09
Chip lithography 65 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 125 Watt

Phenom X4 9650 has 31.6% lower power consumption.

FX-4350, on the other hand, has a 93.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

The FX-4350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9650 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and FX-4350, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650
AMD FX-4350
FX-4350

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 225 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 546 votes

Rate FX-4350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom X4 9650 or FX-4350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.